Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T00:35:09.477Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Population regulation of a classical biological control agent larval density dependence in Neochetina eichhorniae Coleoptera Curculionidae, a biological control agent of water hyacinth Eichhornia crassipes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

J.R.U. Wilson ,
M. Rees  and
O. Ajuonu
J.R.U. Wilson*
Affiliation:
NERC Centre for Population Biology and CABI Bioscience, Imperial College at Silwood Park, Ascot, Berkshire, SL5 7PY, UK DST-NRF Centre for Invasion Biology, Department of Botany and Zoology, University of Stellenbosch, Matieland, 7602, South Africa
M. Rees
Affiliation:
Department of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, S10 2TN, UK
O. Ajuonu
Affiliation:
International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, IITA/BCCA, BP 08-0932, Cotonou, Republic of Benin, West Africa
*
*DST-NRF Centre for Invasion Biology, Department of Botany and Zoology, University of Stellenbosch, Private Bag X1, Matieland 7602, South Africa: Fax +27 (0) 21 808 2995 E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The release of classical biological control agents has reduced the economic, environmental and social problems caused by water hyacinth, Eichhornia crassipes; however, additional control measures are needed in some locations. Water hyacinth plants were treated with different densities of eggs of the weevil Neochetina eichhorniae Warner, one of the main control agents, under different nutrient regimes in a controlled experiment. Plants were destructively sampled and the development of N. eichhorniae was assessed. The survival of first and second instars declined as larval density increased. Plant nutrient status did not directly affect the mortality rate of larvae, but at higher nutrient concentrations larvae developed faster and were larger at a given developmental stage. It is argued that the density dependence operating in N. eichhorniae occurs through an interaction between young larvae and leaf longevity. Consequently, events which disrupt water hyacinth leaf dynamics, e.g. frost or foliar herbicides, will have a disproportionately large effect on the control agents and may reduce the level of control of the host.

Keywords

integrated pest managementdensity dependenceclassical biological controlweedsNeochetina eichhorniaeEichhornia crassipeswater hyacinth
Type
Review Article
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 96 , Issue 2 , April 2006 , pp. 145 - 152
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abjar, Z.E. & Bashir, M.O. (1984) Biology and life-tables of Neochetina bruchi Hustache Coleoptera, Curculionidae introduced to the White Nile, Sudan for the biological control of water hyacinth. Zeitschrift für Angewandte Entomologie 97, 282–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ajuonu, O. & Neuenschwander, P. (2003) Release, establishment, spread and impact of the weevil Neohydronomus affinis Coleoptera Curculionidae on water lettuce Pistia stratiotes in Benin, West Africa. African Entomology 11, 205–211.Google Scholar
Ajuonu, O., Schade, V., Veltman, B., Sedjro, K. & Neuenschwander, P. (2003) Impact of the weevils Neochetina eichhorniae and N. bruchi Coleoptera Curculionidae on water hyacinth, Eichhornia crassipes Pontederiaceae in Benin, West Africa. African Entomology 11, 153–162.Google Scholar
Allen, L.H., Sinclair, T.R. & Bennett, J.M. (1997) Evapotranspiration of vegetation of Florida perpetuated misconceptions versus mechanistic processes. Proceedings of the Soil and Crop Science Society of Florida 56, 1–10.Google Scholar
Bashir, M.O. & Bennett, F.D. (1984) Biological control of water hyacinth on the White Nile, Sudan pp. 491–496 in Delfosse, E.S. (Ed.) Proceedings of the VI International Symposium on Biological Control of Weeds, 1986 Vancouver, Canada, Agriculture Canada.Google Scholar
Bashir, M.O., El Abjar, Z.E., Irving, N.S. (1984) Observations on the effect of the weevils Neochetina eichhorniae Warner and Neochetina bruchi Hustache on the growth of water hyacinth. Hydrobiologia 110, 95–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Center, T.D. (1987) Do water hyacinth and ontogeny affect intra-plant dispersion of Neochetina eichhorniae Coleoptera Curculionidae eggs and larvae. Environmental Entomology 16, 699–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Center, T.D. & Durden, W.C. (1986) Variation in water hyacinth/weevil interactions resulting from temporal differences in weed control efforts. Journal of Aquatic Plant Management 24, 28–38.Google Scholar
Center, T.D. & Van, T.K. (1989) Alteration of water hyacinth Eichhornia crassipes Mart. Solms leaf dynamics and phytochemistry by insect damage and plant density. Aquatic Botany 35, 181–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Center, T.D. & Wright, A.D. (1991) Age and phytochemical composition of water hyacinth Pontederiaceae leaves determine their acceptability to Neochetina eichhorniae Coleoptera Curculionidae. Environmental Entomology 20, 323–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Center, T.D., Steward, K.K. & Bruner, M.C. (1982) Control of water hyacinth Eichhornia crassipes with Neochetina eichhorniae Coleoptera Curculionidae and a growth retardant. Weed Science 30, 453–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Center, T.D., Dray, F.A., Jr., Jubinsky, G.P., Grodowitz M.J. (1999a) Biological control of water hyacinth under conditions of maintenance management can herbicides and insects be integrated. Environmental Management 23, 241–256.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Center, T.D., Dray, F.A., Jr., Jubinsky, G.P., Leslie J. (1999b) Water hyacinth weevils Neochetina eichhorniae and N. bruchi inhibit water hyacinth Eichhornia crassipes colony development. Biological Control 15, 39–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chikwenhere, G.P. (2000) Biological control of water hyacinth, Eichhornia crassipes Martius Solms-Laubach an evaluation of factors affecting population growth of Neochetina bruchi Hustache Coleoptera Curculionidae Copenhagen The Royal Veterinary and Agricultural UniversityGoogle Scholar
DeGroote, H., Ajuonu, O., Attignon, S., Djessou, R. & Neuenschwander, P. (2003) Economic impact of biological control of water hyacinth in southern Benin. Ecological Economics 45, 105–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeLoach, C.J. & Cordo, H.A. (1976a) Ecological studies of Neochetina bruchi and N. eichhorniae on water hyacinth in Argentina. Journal of Aquatic Plant Management 14, 53–59.Google Scholar
DeLoach, C.J. & Cordo, H.A. (1976b) Life cycle and biology of Neochetina bruchi, a weevil attacking water hyacinth in Argentina, with notes on N. eichhorniae. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 69, 643–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deloach, C.J. & Cordo, H.A. (1983) Control of water hyacinth by Neochetina bruchi Coleoptera Curculionidae Bagoini in Argentina. Environmental Entomology 12, 19–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dent, D. (1991) Insect pest management 604 Wallingford CAB InternationalGoogle Scholar
Forno, I.W. (1981) Effects of Neochetina eichhorniae on the growth of water hyacinth. Journal of Aquatic Plant Management 19, 27–31.Google Scholar
Gopal, B. (1987) Water hyacinth 471 Amsterdam ElsevierGoogle Scholar
Grodowitz, M.J., Stewart, R.M. & Cofrancesco, A.F. (1991) Population dynamics of water hyacinth and the biological control agent Neochetina eichhorniae Coleoptera Curculionidae at a southeast Texas location. Environmental Entomology 20, 652–660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haag, K.H. & Center, T.D. (1988) Successful biocontrol of water hyacinth a documented example. Aquatics 10, 19–22.Google Scholar
Heard, T.A. & Winterton, S.L. (2000) Interactions between nutrient status and weevil herbivory in the biological control of water hyacinth. Journal of Applied Ecology 37, 117–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ILEC & UNEP 2001 World lake database. http://www.ilec.or.jp/database/database.htmlGoogle Scholar
Jayanth, K.P. (1988) Successful biological control of water hyacinth Eichhornia crassipes by Neochetina eichhorniae Coleoptera Curculionidae in Bangalore, India. Tropical Pest Management 34, 263–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Julien, M.H., Griffiths, M.W. & Wright, A.D. 1999 Biological control of water hyacinth. The weevils Neochetina bruchi and N. eichhorniae biologies, host ranges, and rearing, releasing and monitoring techniques for biological control of Eichhornia crassipes, Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research ACIAR, Canberra.Google Scholar
Little, E.C.S. & Henson, I.E. (1967) The water content of some important tropical water weeds, PANS (C), 13, 223–227.Google Scholar
McConnachie, A.J., Hill, M.P. & Byrne, M.J. (2004) Field assessment of a frond-feeding weevil, a successful biological control agent of red waterfern, Azolla filiculoides, in southern Africa. Biological Control 29, 326–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McFadyen, R.E.C. (1998) Biological control of weeds. Annual Review of Entomology 43, 369–393.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Murdoch, W.W. & Briggs, C.J. (1996) Theory for biological control recent developments. Ecology 77, 2001–2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paynter, Q. & Flanagan, G.J. (2004) Integrating herbicide and mechanical control treatments with fire and biological control to manage an invasive wetland shrub, Mimosa pigra. Journal of Applied Ecology 41, 615–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinheiro, J.C. & Bates, D.M. (2000) Mixed-effects models in S and S-PLUS. 528 New York, Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Room, P.M., Harley, K.L.S., Forno, I.W., Sands, D.P.A. (1981) Successful biological control of the floating weed Salvinia. Nature 294, 78–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Room, P.M., Julien, M.H. & Forno, I.W. (1989) Vigorous plants suffer most from herbivores – latitude, nitrogen and biological control of the weed Salvinia molesta. Oikos 54, 92–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shih, C.I.T., Chen, H.Y., Wang, C.J. & Chang, H.Y. (1994) Life history, feeding and oviposition preferences of water hyacinth weevils, Neochetina eichhorniae Warner Coleoptera Curculionidae. Chinese Journal of Entomology 14, 207–216. in ChineseGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, A.R.E. (1989) Population regulation in animals. p.385 in Cherrett, J.M. (Ed.) Ecological concepts Cherrett Oxford, Blackwell.Google Scholar
Van, T.K., Center, T.D. (1994) Effect of Paclobutrazol and water hyacinth weevil Neochetina eichhorniae on plant growth and leaf dynamics of water hyacinth Eichhornia crassipes. Weed Science 42, 665–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Venables, W.N. & Ripley, B.D. (1997) Modern applied statistics with S. 495 pp. New YorkSpringer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wheeler, G.S. (2001) Host plant quality factors that influence the growth and development of Oxyops vitosa, a biological control agent of Melaleuca quinquenervia. Biological Control 22, 256–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wheeler, G.S., Van, T.K., Center, T.D. (1998) Herbivore adaptations to a low-nutrient food weed biological control specialist Spodoptera pectiniccornis Lepidoptera Noctuidae fed the floating aquatic plant Pistia stratiotes. Environmental Entomology 27, 993–1000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, J.R., Holst, N. & Rees, M. (2005) Determinants and patterns of population growth in water hyacinth. Aquatic Botany 81, 51–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar